Older car lower mileage or newer car higher mileage ?

property.advert

Same make and model - Nissan Murano 3.5L auto

2006 - 20k miles FSH (steady 3/4k per year over the last few years)

or

2008 - 80k to 100k miles FSH

My head says take the 20k model but is this a wise choice ?

harrys_dad

I personally would take the higher mileage one, especially if it was a diesel. A car that has done 3/4k a year has rarely even been warmed up, and the engine is likely to be at least as worn as a high miler that has dome motorway miles. Having said that, why would anyone want a 3.5l car to travel 3/4k a year???Why would anyone want one anyway?

Ultrasonic

I would look for a 2006 car with higher mileage, say 50,000 plus. You'll be paying a premium for the low mileage that isn't justified.

Very low mileage can be a risk, it depends how the car has been driven. If it is low mileage because it just does occasional long trips that is usually OK, but if as is more likely it is low mileage due to lots of short trips this is not so good. You'll never know for sure which is the case.

Mankysteve

What's the service history like?

property.advert

Mankysteve wrote: »

What's the service history like?

Full detailed showing 3/4k per year.

Owner overseas 4 month a year and second car. Hence low usage rather than to the shops and back each day.

property.advert

harrys_dad wrote: »

I personally would take the higher mileage one, especially if it was a diesel. A car that has done 3/4k a year has rarely even been warmed up, and the engine is likely to be at least as worn as a high miler that has dome motorway miles. Having said that, why would anyone want a 3.5l car to travel 3/4k a year???Why would anyone want one anyway?

Not diesel, petrol.

Why have one ? I couldn't care about mpg but I'd rather the mechanics were not destroyed by years of high mileage hammer.

I have a 1.8L auto which I bought with an average of 5k per annum and that was 3 years ago and it was and still is very tight, true and way different to high mileage examples.

bigjl

If you buy a three year old just off lease high miler they are just as tight as a low miler.

The caveat is to make sure you don't buy something that has spent a lot of the time driving round a big city such as London

My V50 felt like a new car when i bought it with over 100k at three years old and was the price of a 6yr old V50.

Never broke down and only issue was the interior heating fan which is s common issue with the V50.

My old mk3 Mondeo drove like a new car aswell despite having almost 90k on purchase.

Motorway miles don't wear the dmf don't clog the dpf and cause little wesr to the clutch or suspension.

I would always buy new with high miles.

I am also not willing to pay for the UK or possibly English need to have a low miler snd the premium they attract.

Clocking only exists because of this premium.

And to be honest if i had clocked my Mondeo back to 100k you would have thought it was in good condition for that mileage let alone having done 150k more.

But bought with care a young high miler is a bargain.

And if demand is low they are just cheaper for those with a little bit of common sense and knowledge.

property.advert

bigjl wrote: »

....
But bought with care a young high miler is a bargain.

And if demand is low they are just cheaper for those with a little bit of common sense and knowledge.

I tend to agree and the engine in this one (from the 350Z) is largely bulletproof.

Perhaps what puts me off a little is the attrition they get from high miles and the fact that this one will be kept a while, so low miles now plus what I put on it means still reasonable miles.

Not an easy decision (for me) as I see both sides of the argument.

Ultrasonic

property.advert wrote: »

I couldn't care about mpg...

How depressing .

mutley74

I would go for a low mileage car IMHO. I last time had a 2005 Toyota diesel not even 75k on the clock but suffered various major probs inc gearbox failure. Lower mileage gives u more peace of mind that it has not been driven harshly.......guess all depends what u want/afford etc.

property.advert

Ultrasonic wrote: »

How depressing .

Why ?

Don't do starship mileage so whether it is 18 mpg or 28 mpg makes no difference.